NVIDIA B200 SXM6 vs NVIDIA RTX 6000D Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data does not include any direct head-to-head benchmark results between the NVIDIA B200 SXM6 and the NVIDIA RTX 6000D. The head-to-head benchmark array is empty, and the win counters for both parts are zero. As a result, no direct performance comparison can be drawn from side-by-side testing in the database. However, the RTX 6000D has two standalone benchmark entries that provide measurable reference points, while the B200 SXM6 has no submitted benchmark scores at all.

The RTX 6000D scores 3,522 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 and 388,405 in Geekbench OpenCL. Its average benchmark score across these two tests is 195,964, placing it in the 98th percentile of all GPUs in the database. This percentile rank indicates that, among all recorded graphics cards, the RTX 6000D outperforms 98% of them in aggregate benchmark terms. The B200 SXM6, by contrast, has an average benchmark score of 0 and sits in the 50th percentile, which reflects its lack of submitted benchmark data rather than its theoretical compute capability.

Relative to its nearest rivals, the RTX 6000D shows a narrow advantage over the NVIDIA Tesla V100S PCIe 32 GB, which averages 194,415, a delta of 0.8% in favor of the RTX 6000D. Against the NVIDIA A100 SXM4 40 GB, the RTX 6000D leads by 4.7%, with the A100 SXM4 averaging 187,147. The RTX 6000D also beats the NVIDIA RTX 5000 Ada Generation by 6.1%, as that card averages 184,664. The only rival that surpasses the RTX 6000D in this group is the NVIDIA A100 PCIe 80 GB, which averages 207,124, a delta of -5.4% relative to the RTX 6000D. This means the A100 PCIe 80 GB is roughly 5.4% ahead of the RTX 6000D in average benchmark score, a modest gap given the architectural differences between the two.

The absence of benchmark data for the B200 SXM6 means the database cannot confirm its real-world performance ranking. Its theoretical specifications, however, suggest a different performance profile from the RTX 6000D, particularly in memory bandwidth and tensor operations. The B200 SXM6 carries 180 GB of HBM3e memory with 8.19 TB/s of bandwidth, while the RTX 6000D uses 84 GB of GDDR7 with 1.40 TB/s. That bandwidth difference, a factor of roughly 5.85, points to workloads where the B200 SXM6 would excel, such as large model inference or high-throughput data processing. The RTX 6000D, on the other hand, posts higher raw compute figures in FP32 and FP16, both at 97.04 TFLOPS, versus 69.34 TFLOPS for the B200 SXM6.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs share the same 5 nm process node and TSMC foundry, but they diverge sharply in chip design and memory architecture. The B200 SXM6 uses the GB100 chip, built on the Blackwell architecture, while the RTX 6000D uses the GB202 chip, built on Blackwell 2.0. Both belong to NVIDIA’s Blackwell family, but they target different market segments: the B200 SXM6 is classified under Server Blackwell (Bxx) generation, while the RTX 6000D falls under Blackwell PRO W (x000) generation. The B200 SXM6’s predecessor is Server Hopper, and its successor is Server Rubin. The RTX 6000D’s predecessor is Workstation Ada, and it has no recorded successor.

Transistor counts differ substantially. The B200 SXM6 packs 208,000 million transistors on a 1628 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 127.8 million transistors per square millimeter. The RTX 6000D contains 92,200 million transistors on a 750 mm² die, with a density of 122.9 million per square millimeter. The B200 SXM6’s die is more than twice the size of the RTX 6000D’s, and its transistor count is more than double, though the density figures are relatively close. This suggests the B200 SXM6 dedicates more die area to memory and interconnect structures, consistent with its HBM3e stack and massive 8192-bit memory bus.

Memory architecture is a defining difference. The B200 SXM6 uses HBM3e with 180 GB capacity, an 8192-bit bus, and 8.19 TB/s bandwidth. Its memory clock is listed as 2000 MHz with 8 Gbps effective. The RTX 6000D uses GDDR7 with 84 GB capacity, a 448-bit bus, and 1.40 TB/s bandwidth, with a memory clock of 1560 MHz and 25 Gbps effective. The bus width difference, 8192 bits versus 448 bits, explains the bandwidth gap. The B200 SXM6 is designed for memory-bound workloads where capacity and bandwidth are paramount, while the RTX 6000D’s GDDR7 configuration favors lower latency and higher clock speeds for graphics-oriented tasks.

Compute unit counts also differ. The B200 SXM6 has 18,944 shading units, 592 texture mapping units, and 24 raster output units. It also has 592 tensor cores. The RTX 6000D has 19,968 shading units, 624 TMUs, and 192 ROPs, along with 156 ray tracing cores and 624 tensor cores. The RTX 6000D has more shading units, TMUs, and ROPs, plus dedicated RT cores that the B200 SXM6 lacks entirely (its RT core count is null). The B200 SXM6’s pixel rate is 43.92 GPixel/s and texture rate is 1,083.4 GTexel/s, while the RTX 6000D achieves 466.6 GPixel/s and 1,516.3 GTexel/s. These figures show the RTX 6000D is far stronger in rasterization throughput, a logical outcome given its workstation and graphics focus.

Clock behavior is another key divergence. The B200 SXM6 has a base clock of 120 MHz and a boost clock of 1830 MHz. The RTX 6000D has a base clock of 1992 MHz and a boost clock of 2430 MHz. The B200 SXM6’s very low base clock is typical of server accelerators that rely on boost states under sustained load, whereas the RTX 6000D runs at much higher clocks across the board. This contributes to the RTX 6000D’s higher FP32 and FP16 throughput, 97.04 TFLOPS versus 69.34 TFLOPS, despite having a similar shading unit count.

The B200 SXM6 is an SXM module with no display outputs, no power connector listed, and a 1000 W TDP with a 1400 W suggested PSU. The RTX 6000D is a dual-slot card, 304 mm long, 137 mm tall, and 40 mm wide, with a single 16-pin power connector, a 600 W TDP, and a 1000 W suggested PSU. It has four DisplayPort 2.1b outputs. The B200 SXM6 supports PCIe 6.0 x16, while the RTX 6000D uses PCIe 5.0 x16. The B200 SXM6 has no API support listed for DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan, while the RTX 6000D supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute performance?

A: The RTX 6000D delivers 97.04 TFLOPS in FP32, while the B200 SXM6 delivers 69.34 TFLOPS. The RTX 6000D is ahead by approximately 39.9% in this metric.

Q: What are the memory capacities and types of each GPU?

A: The B200 SXM6 has 180 GB of HBM3e memory, while the RTX 6000D has 84 GB of GDDR7. The B200 SXM6 also has a much wider 8192-bit memory bus and 8.19 TB/s bandwidth, compared to the RTX 6000D’s 448-bit bus and 1.40 TB/s bandwidth.

Q: Does the RTX 6000D support ray tracing?

A: Yes, the RTX 6000D has 156 ray tracing cores. The B200 SXM6 does not list any RT core count, and its API support for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan is marked as N/A.

Q: What is the TDP of each GPU?

A: The B200 SXM6 has a TDP of 1000 W with a suggested PSU of 1400 W. The RTX 6000D has a TDP of 600 W with a suggested PSU of 1000 W.

Q: What is the release date for each GPU?

A: The B200 SXM6 was released on 2024-10-31. The RTX 6000D was released on 2025-07-13.

Q: How does the RTX 6000D compare to its nearest rivals in average benchmark score?

A: The RTX 6000D averages 195,964. It leads the Tesla V100S PCIe 32 GB by 0.8%, the A100 SXM4 40 GB by 4.7%, and the RTX 5000 Ada Generation by 6.1%. The A100 PCIe 80 GB leads the RTX 6000D by 5.4%.

The Verdict

The data indicates two distinct design philosophies. The B200 SXM6 is a server accelerator optimized for memory capacity and bandwidth, with 180 GB of HBM3e and 8.19 TB/s throughput. Its 1000 W TDP, SXM form factor, and lack of display outputs confirm a data-center orientation. The RTX 6000D is a workstation GPU with graphics capabilities, including ray tracing cores, four DisplayPort outputs, and full DirectX 12 Ultimate support. Its 600 W TDP and dual-slot design make it suitable for conventional workstation chassis.

Benchmark results only exist for the RTX 6000D, which sits in the 98th percentile of all GPUs and leads most of its nearest rivals by small margins. The B200 SXM6 has no recorded benchmark scores, so its real-world standing cannot be verified from the database. Buyers needing graphics rendering, ray tracing, or display output should select the RTX 6000D based on its measured performance and feature set. Buyers targeting memory-bound server workloads, such as large-scale model training or inference, should consider the B200 SXM6 for its 180 GB capacity and 8.19 TB/s bandwidth, though its benchmark validation remains absent.

Specification Differences

• Chip: GB100 (B200 SXM6) vs GB202 (RTX 6000D)
• Architecture: Blackwell (B200 SXM6) vs Blackwell 2.0 (RTX 6000D)
• Generation: Server Blackwell (Bxx) (B200 SXM6) vs Blackwell PRO W (x000) (RTX 6000D)
• Transistors: 208,000 million (B200 SXM6) vs 92,200 million (RTX 6000D)
• Die Size: 1628 mm² (B200 SXM6) vs 750 mm² (RTX 6000D)
• Transistor Density: 127.8M / mm² (B200 SXM6) vs 122.9M / mm² (RTX 6000D)
• Base Clock: 120 MHz (B200 SXM6) vs 1992 MHz (RTX 6000D)
• Boost Clock: 1830 MHz (B200 SXM6) vs 2430 MHz (RTX 6000D)
• Memory Clock: 2000 MHz 8 Gbps effective (B200 SXM6) vs 1560 MHz 25 Gbps effective (RTX 6000D)
• Memory Size: 180 GB (B200 SXM6) vs 84 GB (RTX 6000D)
• Memory Type: HBM3e (B200 SXM6) vs GDDR7 (RTX 6000D)
• Memory Bus Width: 8192 bit (B200 SXM6) vs 448 bit (RTX 6000D)
• Memory Bandwidth: 8.19 TB/s (B200 SXM6) vs 1.40 TB/s (RTX 6000D)
• Shading Units: 18944 (B200 SXM6) vs 19968 (RTX 6000D)
• TMUs: 592 (B200 SXM6) vs 624 (RTX 6000D)
• ROPs: 24 (B200 SXM6) vs 192 (RTX 6000D)
• RT Cores: None (B200 SXM6) vs 156 (RTX 6000D)
• Tensor Cores: 592 (B200 SXM6) vs 624 (RTX 6000D)
• Pixel Rate: 43.92 GPixel/s (B200 SXM6) vs 466.6 GPixel/s (RTX 6000D)
• Texture Rate: 1,083.4 GTexel/s (B200 SXM6) vs 1,516.3 GTexel/s (RTX 6000D)
• FP32: 69.34 TFLOPS (B200 SXM6) vs 97.04 TFLOPS (RTX 6000D)
• FP16: 69.34 TFLOPS 1:1 (B200 SXM6) vs 97.04 TFLOPS 1:1 (RTX 6000D)
• TDP: 1000 W (B200 SXM6) vs 600 W (RTX 6000D)
• Slot Width: SXM Module (B200 SXM6) vs Dual-slot (RTX 6000D)
• Power Connectors: None (B200 SXM6) vs 1x 16-pin (RTX 6000D)
• Suggested PSU: 1400 W (B200 SXM6) vs 1000 W (RTX 6000D)
• Bus Interface: PCIe 6.0 x16 (B200 SXM6) vs PCIe 5.0 x16 (RTX 6000D)
• Display Outputs: No outputs (B200 SXM6) vs 4x DisplayPort 2.1b (RTX 6000D)
• DirectX: N/A (B200 SXM6) vs 12 Ultimate (12_2) (RTX 6000D)
• OpenGL: N/A (B200 SXM6) vs 4.6 (RTX 6000D)
• Vulkan: N/A (B200 SXM6) vs 1.4 (RTX 6000D)
• Dimensions: None listed (B200 SXM6) vs 304 mm x 137 mm x 40 mm (RTX 6000D)
• Release Date: 2024-10-31 (B200 SXM6) vs 2025-07-13 (RTX 6000D)
• Predecessor: Server Hopper (B200 SXM6) vs Workstation Ada (RTX 6000D)
• Successor: Server Rubin (B200 SXM6) vs None (RTX 6000D)
• Launch MSRP: 34,999 USD (B200 SXM6) vs 8,565 USD (RTX 6000D)